LAUC Technology

From LAUCWiki
Revision as of 15:35, 6 February 2012 by Phoebe (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Librarians need more and more training on technical (and management) issues to develop new skill sets

• Data curation will be huge. We need expertise.

• Scholarly publishing will increase.

o Cross-training within the library (7)

• Technology – related to infrastructure, there must be a universal technology used at all

• Technical Services has expertise that should be utilized in facilitating this change.

• WorldCat local is complicated by how difficult it is to access electronic content and how difficult it is to determine local availability. (8)

• Patrons expect that electronic materials have replaced print. (3)

• Mobile technology in all areas. They are a part of the job environment. We will provide mobile devices for students to use. (21)

• Challenge for us to help patrons in unfamiliar electronic environments via tools such as QP. (4)

• Digital delivery of any digital content (e.g. UC pays for any request, like Questia articles) (6)

• Federated searching that is less helpful than a user wants or needs (4)

• problems reconciling local v. more union-like catalogs. (6)


All groups expressed satisfaction with the internet (read Google) and the library although the library came in for complaints for difficulty in retrieving information--as opposed to finding it. The recommendation from those surveyed was to improve the library by making it more like Google.

Dervin, B., Reinhard, C. D., Kerr, Z. Y., Song, M., and She, F. C.: Sense-making the information confluence: The whys and hows of college and university user satisficing of information needs. Phase II: Sense-making online survey and phone interview study, Institute of Museum and Library Services School of Communication, Washington D.C. Columbus, OH, 2006.

-With language as its object of study, the humanities can benefit enormously from digital technologies that can speed up the analysis of language.

- Among the digitized collections in existence, it is easier to find works prior to 1923 than afterwards because of copyright conditions.

-There are problems with the quality of scanning stemming from the limitations of Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology.

-Many documents are available in snippets. Collections do not overlap as much as one might suspect.

-It further appears that there are deeply ingrained cultural patterns in humanities research based in the use of print resources. For these reasons, the report, for the foreseeable future sees a mixture of print and electronic resources instead of a wholesale conversion to digitization.

Henry, Charles, and Kathlin Smith. Ghostlier Demarcations: Large-Scale Text Digitization Projects and Their Utility for Contemporary Humanities Scholarship. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources, 2010.

-Both UC Berkeley and UCSF have launched programs for accessing their websites from small mobile devices to increase accessibility to their collections. UCSF offers a range of capabilities for patrons accessing remotely. UC Berkeley allows patrons to search the library catalog with their cell phones and copy citations directly into the phones. More about each program can be found here:


UC Berkeley

-Tools included a use of Google Forms as a spreadsheet; innovative uses of twitter; tools for arranging and holding meetings over distances, time zones, and language barriers; debugging tools for web pages; cataloging tools and more. A link to the event is provided below. However, much of it had to do with professional work and communication between other professionals, a breakout technology to interact with the vast activity of social networking among students and patrons did not appear and has yet to be found.

A wiki page for the event can be found at:

- An overwhelming percentage began with internet search tools before moving to the library.

-chat reference - working with remote campuses not efficient; staffing issues pose a barrier to more service

-communications technology: e.g. libguides, Second Life, chat reference, Skype (bibliographer groups), Facebook, YouTube,

-new hardware to support communication and mobility (headsets, microphones, webcams for live video, choice of laptop vs. desktop computer)

-training & technology support for new project initiatives and content creation: opportunity to explore the use of new and old technologies in a "sandbox environment" to foster our in-house creativity, collaboration and peer-to-peer learning (requires rethinking of budget and time allocations, initiated by librarians with systems support)

-security/permissions issues stand in the way of using some useful technologies; (these restrictions, in some cases, originate at the campus level)

-social networking may not be relevant to the library's future; publicity tools not reference

-tutorials limited by rapid change of databases which make them irrelevant; tutorials may be viable if limited to major resources or perhaps as links to tutorials by vendors

-library chat for each reference desk: needs to be localized to campus rather than current 24/7 which brings in questions throughout the system; chat should incorporate text messaging

-Next Generation: inadequacy of Next Generation interface; overwhelming resource which floods the user with information; retain local catalog with local notes, easy search of UCDavis titles; improved accuracy/precision of a local catalog

- preservation/archiving technology: currently lack infrastructure to support digitization (produce, access), onsite; increased coordination necessary with CDL

- Endnote offers opportunities for new involvement with research practices

-use of clickers under consideration

- optimal future: local catalog, improved infras